FBI Agents Don't Have Email Access 308
the_bikeman writes "According to CNN, many FBI agents do not have access to an email account, and only 100 of the 2000 New York FBI agents have a Internet-ready mobile phone. Spokeswoman Cathy Milhoan said 'e-mail addresses are still being assigned, adding that the city bureau's 2,000 employees would all have accounts by the end of the year.'"
How convenient! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How convenient! (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder what kind of ads they would get?
Re:How convenient! (Score:5, Funny)
Can't find Narcotics smuggler Alberto Ramirez? Use AskJeeves.com!
Make your own heroin, cocaine and ecstasy using our Home ChemLab 2.0!
...just imagine them investigating a pedo case.
Re:How convenient! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How convenient! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How convenient! (Score:4, Funny)
"The FBI doesn't need their own email access, they have yours!"
Re:How convenient! (Score:5, Funny)
And if they forgot their password (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How convenient! (Score:2, Funny)
FBI + Email = Finally some real results against spam?
----
Re:How convenient! (Score:3, Funny)
It's ALL Vanity (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It's ALL Vanity (Score:5, Funny)
But that still wouldn't satisfy his ego.
It's Clear (Score:5, Funny)
-Peter
Re:It's Clear (Score:5, Funny)
by the end of the year
to get 2000 email accounts set up.
Re:It's Clear (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It's Clear (Score:2)
Re:It's Clear (Score:2)
-Eric
Re:It's Clear (Score:2)
I'd like to say that it must be cronyism at it worst, but sadly I cannot.
Re:It's Clear (Score:3, Insightful)
Because you haven't a clue that it is?
alwyas true ... (Score:2)
The EU, and to a decreasing extent, the UK, .au and .ca have larger bureaucracies than the US because government employment has higher social status so it attracts more talented individuals.
Do you really want a more competant government? You will just get more of it, until it expands to it's limit of
Re:It's Clear (Score:2)
You laugh (Score:5, Insightful)
Not that I'm thrilled that they seem to be intent on gathering scattershot information when they can (taking pictures of protesters, granting themselves the right to listen in to phone calls). They don't even have time to process the information they have.
pre-9/11 (Score:5, Funny)
Funny, I thought it was a pre-1995 mentality.
Re:pre-9/11 (Score:5, Insightful)
Recently our boss decided that any account that we have on our web applications needed a mode of contact. Something consistant for everyone. We debated a little, but the obvious solution was to simply require an email address, which in turn becomes their username. I mean it's 2006... who DOESN'T have an email address.
A week later, we get an excited new client. It is my job to set up the handful of user accounts for our webapps... and I simply boggled at the first guys response when I asked for his email address:
"3657 Washington Roa..."
"No, your Email address."
"3657 Wash..."
"EEEEEEEEEEEE Mail address!"
"What do you mean?"
"What do you mean what do I mean? What is your email address?"
"I don't know what that is"
He DOESNT KNOW WHAT THAT IS!!! That's like saying you don't know what a road is. Someone please explain to me how and why such people still exist? Keep in mind, these people are going to CONSTANTLY use a WEB application, yet
*boggle*
"But can't I fax it to you?" (Score:3, Funny)
-Eric
Re:"But can't I fax it to you?" (Score:4, Funny)
I would have got a job in a better timeline, but that's the price of taking a liberal arts degree..
Re:"But can't I fax it to you?" (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, I think this is an area where Outlook Express (and probably other email clients) suck. Here is what happens:
Person receives email with attachment
Person opens attachment, makes changes and saves attachment
Person forwards email back to original sender.
Did the original sender get the modified document? No. Yet, most people don't understand why this does not work
Does FAX have a different legal standing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:pre-9/11 (Score:2)
On the other hand... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:pre-9/11 (Score:2, Informative)
Re:pre-9/11 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Good lord, I hope you didn't really say that. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good lord, I hope you didn't really say that. (Score:5, Insightful)
Every advert and TV programme for god knows how long has had a web page attached, and most also have an email address. Every phone-in programme or radio programme I've heard for the last 10 years has had the "ring us on xxx or email on xxx". For the last 5 or more, they've also had "or text us on xxx".
Bad analogy time? OK - failing to know of the existence of email is as bad as failing to know of the existence of mobile phones. They've both been around for about the same length of time. Their very existence stares you in the face every day. To not know about them would require that you are unaware of any new inventions created in the last 10-15 years.
Note that I don't require you to have one, or to be fully conversant with its use, or to know what the latest-and-greatest version is. That's all your technocrat stuff. But simply to know that it exists qualifies you as an active member of Western civilisation. I don't think it's too strong to say that if you're so out of touch with the world today that you've never heard of email, then you are not an active member of society. It indicates that you never talk to other people, never read the papers, never read books, never watch the TV, and never listen to the radio. Society-wise, you could be dead and no-one would notice the difference.
Grab.
Re:Good lord, I hope you didn't really say that. (Score:3, Interesting)
"I don't know what that is"
Ever struck you that he could have been replying that he didn't know what the email address itself is? A far more likely response...
Re:So substitute some other word, it's still the s (Score:3, Insightful)
But this is almost like buying a card, and when the salesman asks for your driver license, you reply "I don't know what you are talking about". Not "I don't have a license", but "I don't know what in hell is this license".
It is pretty weird.
No email is fine by me... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No email is fine by me... (Score:2)
Re:No email is fine by me... (Score:2, Interesting)
I like to think that FBI agents are busy in some sense their entire shift. I don't want to think of them wasting time as much as any of us are right now, and I'm home sick. Please don't bust my bubble of comfortable misconception.
I was employed to monitor the web and email traffic at a medium sized bank (~3400 emplo
on the plus side (Score:2, Funny)
and the next highest placing class out of quantico will be introduced to the fancy new 'telephone' that is rumored that a guy name alexander graham bell has perfected
Re:on the plus side (Score:2)
and the next highest placing class out of quantico will be introduced to the fancy new 'telephone' that is rumored that a guy name alexander graham bell has perfected
Next thing you know, the FBI agent's time will be taken up by nickelodeons and vaudeville, rather than the pursuit of those dastardly beermakers that roam the streets freely, corrupting the morals of women and making shiftless drunkards out of th
Where did all the money go? (Score:5, Insightful)
So let me get this straight, $9 billion goes missing in Iraq, the war has cost US taxpayers about $250 billion so far, oil companies have record profit$, our national debt ceiling was raised to $9 trillion and we can't afford to supply email to the FBI?
What is going on? And, does anyone even care?
I have an idea... (Score:2)
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:2, Troll)
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:2)
I think you're taking the quote a bit out of context, and even if you aren't I do not see that your argument is necessarily true. Let me provide a counterexample to show you what I am thinking.
The FBI has a budget of x dollars. In that budget, they have to determine necessary expenses for all of their operations for the year. Which would do more to protect and help us as a country: email for all the employees or the ability to hire 2 extra people in the field? Couple that with exactly what you quoted
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:3, Informative)
Behind every tech, whether free or not, is a cost. In the case of the FBI, I personally can see an email service necessitating many additional costs, such as: IT personnel to manage the service, hardware to run the service, AND (a biggie) securing the service from inside and outside. That's not even taking into account encryption setup and maintenence that you can bet they are going demand before even considering such a service.
If
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:2)
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:3, Insightful)
My main point in bringing up email's relative low cost (again: not free), is that the comparison of saying that you can hire two more field agents for the price of email seems bunk. Yes, initial setup, and ongoin
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:2)
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:3, Interesting)
First of all, I would think that e-mail was a NECESSARY tool for anyone working today. Rapid communication is going to help protect this country by getting the information to the agents in the field. 2 extra people is not going to help if they can't even coordinate their communications properly. If you are trying to say they
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:2)
Actually, I don't think a centralized email system within the FBI is a necessary work tool. Is it desired? Yes. Would such an ability provide benefit to agents to get their jobs done mroe effectively? Definitely. Would it do more than anything else on the laundry list of things to be funded? I honestly do not know. I wasn't intending to argue that email is a waste of money, but just that there is a potential for other avenues of spending to yield more results. However, to take on the last part of yo
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:3, Insightful)
Then the time they spend opening post in the morning, and filing it and buying filing cabinets
It's easy to take a crack at e-mail as a productivity killer. But I worked in an office before it came along and there was an entire internal bureaucracy devoted to transporting mail, opening it, filing
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:2)
No, they don't. People are going to look at this and say "I have e-mail, why don't they?" and then they are going to think about it for about 2.2 seconds until the teaser for American Idol, The Apprentice, or Survivor come on and they forget all about it.
Re:Where did all the money go? (Score:2)
Ooh, it's tuesday, American Idol is on. I hope that chicken little Kevin guy gets voted off... he sucks. Paris rules, though.
TRAITOR! (Score:2)
Good news for them.... (Score:2)
This makes sense actually (Score:5, Insightful)
With record keeping comes accountability... is it any wonder they don't write things down? Until rather recently, there was no satisfactory manner to keep such communications to mobile devices secure/encrypted. If anyone knows if the govmint is spying on people, the FBI should. Makes you wonder..... ????
use the cone of silence (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_of_silence [wikipedia.org]
Re:This makes sense actually (Score:2)
-Eric
Re:This makes sense actually (Score:2)
(And the CIA's remit is dirty tricks overseas. The US has no overseas intelligence gathering or analysis capability. Intelligence analysis is the president's job. Turf wars R us, God help us all.)
RTFA. We're talking about law enforcement. (Score:5, Insightful)
One mis-step in a CC or Reply-All and you could completely torpedo an investigation or a trial. Just look at what one lackluster prosecutor did with some ill-conceived e-mail sent to prospective witnesses during the ongoing 9/11 trial happening right now. This subject is a lot more complicated than meets the eye.
Re:RTFA. We're talking about law enforcement. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:RTFA. We're talking about law enforcement. (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course it wasn't an accident in the "oops, I forwarded this to the wrong addresses" sense. It was poor judgement. But the technology that made it so easy for her to do it was: internet enabled e-mail. My point is that the "cost" of turning on publicly-transcieving e-mail accounts for investigators and other people with legally critical jobs involve more than some server admin mouseclicks and a little more storage... there's substantial training and oversight involved.
Re:RTFA. We're talking about law enforcement. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:RTFA. We're talking about law enforcement. (Score:3, Funny)
THESE are the people we worry about spying on us (Score:2)
-Eric
Re:RTFA. We're talking about law enforcement. (Score:2)
I'm more concerned about web access (Score:2)
No, you can't ask Google "Where is Osama bin Laden?" But actual intelligence work assumes that you know about the real world. If you want to check a phone book, look on a map, check a dictionary, it really sucks to have to replicate those features on the
Law enforcement does have e-mail --hotmail, gmail (Score:2)
That's Just Crap... (Score:5, Insightful)
>look at what one lackluster prosecutor did with some ill-conceived e-mail
Jesus H. Armadillo! Are we going to drag our whole government operation down to the level of the least competent person in the organization? I have worked in companies that had the philosophy of creating new restrictions every time some idiot abused or misused some tool or benefit. This served to limit the ability of the competent to actually get things done.
After a while, I got so frustrated that I quit and found a better job. There is a better way to run things: Fire The Morons! This "lackluster prosecutor" has at least seven years of university education and a six-figure salary. Am I wrong to expect competence and accountability? It's not like there's a shortage of lawyers in this country. Fire the fool and hire someone that can follow simple instructions.
The FBI is supposed to have the best and the brightest cops in the country. If they can't be trusted not to send the case file on some mass murderer as an email attachment to the guy's uncle, we're just screwed anyway. If I hear one more time, that we can't get rid of some idiot, because we have all this time and money invested in his training, I'm going to scream. We may have spent a lot of time and money, but it didn't work. Fire The Morons! I guarantee we'll be better off.
Thank you for listening. I'm going to go take my medication now.
Re:That's Just Crap... (Score:3, Funny)
Yes! In fact, we're going to put that psrson in charge!
Email, problem. Cell phones, not a problem. (Score:5, Insightful)
So? I make my living as a geek, and don't have an internet-ready cell phone.
Why would I pay more, for a service redundant with something I already have, yet with a far lower quality presentation?
When I want to do something online, I'll use a PC. When I want to call someone, I'll use my cell phone. They each serve entirely separate purposes, and as long as my eyes work better scanning large surfaces than a 1.5 inch square, they will continue serving different purposes.
Re:Email, problem. Cell phones, not a problem. (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:Email, problem. Cell phones, not a problem. (Score:4, Insightful)
No kidding... Your point?
I also don't want to read email (which increasingly includes web-like formatting), chat on IRC, or read UseNET on a 1.5 inch screen; And my phone doesn't make the best destination for downloading files via FTP or any P2P; And it takes far too long to enter alphanumeric data to make anything even remotely interactive (ie, ssh) useful on a cellphone.
I suppose getting an RSS feed might prove vaguely useful, but not nearly enough to justify the increased expense - And y'know, with a government that can't seem to spend our tax dollars fast enough, I can't say it really bothers me that the FBI hasn't caught on to yet another way to waste our money.
So, repeat after me - Contextually useless distinctions don't require enumeration.
Re:Email, problem. Cell phones, not a problem. (Score:2)
I use python code on my phone to inject items into my phone's calendar, including via email (i.e. I send an email to 6600@domain.com with a specific format and it will get into my calendar)
My phone has IMAP capability which has proved extremely useful.
My phone has an SSH client which has saved me hundreds of miles of travel in it's time.
However, the Opera Web Browser is particularly useless. Sites rarely look good / work well.
Re:Email, problem. Cell phones, not a problem. (Score:2)
Dude.
Get a sidekick II.
I have email (both pop3 and imap clients), as well as text messaging, AIM, web browsing, and an ssh/telnet client, so if I really wanted (and I have before) I can log in and read my mail with pine.
Plus, qwerty keyboard and big screen.
~W
Re:Email, problem. Cell phones, not a problem. (Score:2)
I've got a browser on my mobile phone, simply because I may need to pick up mail when I'm way away from any PC. Using a PDA with ssh on it simply lets me use a text terminal when I need interactive shells on the servers, in case the rest of the kit is unavailable (or I'm miles away from anywhere, and unexpectedly need to work via shell).
Yes, they may be redundant, but when your main access channels are d
Doy doy da doy? (Score:2)
Boo Hoo (Score:4, Insightful)
Clue: It is right under your nose, use it!
Jack Bauer? (Score:2, Funny)
Which one? (Score:2)
Re:Jack Bauer? (Score:2)
-Eric
WTF! Story from 1995 or something? (Score:2, Interesting)
Sounds like a nasty mixture of bureaucracy and inefficiency to me. Is there a difference between employees and agents? (do cleaners need e
Phishing for Feds (Score:2)
The problem with the FBI using public protocols on public networks is that it opens non-public data to some serious technological and human security holes.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Mod parent +1 100% True (Score:3, Interesting)
If people had any idea how much burearucratic bullshit that goes on in the FBI, you would have a totally different opinion of them. I find it amazing they are able to do any work at all with all of the political infighting and constant management changes that goes on within the FBI.
If you want to know what really goes on with the FBI, take your local agent out for a drink sometime!
Would it be just like the movies? (Score:3, Funny)
Are they engraving requests on stone tablets? (Score:2)
Big ISPs add this many email users in a few hours -and they don't have the advantage of importing from an existing HR system with people details. (I guess the FBI doesn't either)
FBI's IT is, once again, proven to be shockingly primitive. Maybe instead of spending $2 Trillion on Iraq (which is creating a terrorist breeding g
Misconfiguration? (Score:2)
Not to defend Gov't stuff... (Score:4, Interesting)
I know from personal experience that government-funded/government-used technical systems are generally either:
1)Ultra-over-engineered to be sure that the system/thing is ultra-safe or ultra-reliable or ultra-accountable
2)Woefully inadequate because the person(s) in the bureaucracy don't have the tech expertise to foster the effort correctly - and yet place massive, uninformed, and inappropriate amounts of pressure on the worker bees to get the job done as per the way the non-tech person thinks it needs to go.
3)Many projects die on the vine because mis-direction (and management that honestly doesn't have the knowledge they need to lead the effort) makes the project wander in the desert for huge periods of time.
4)I could go on...
But in all fairness, governmental technical efforts have many different and sometimes unique pressures on them. The government literally has to have permission from someone to do anything with public systems. The public (rightfully) wants as much transparency and accountability as possible in governmental efforts - which means everything is debated, re-documented, justified, cleared, reviewed, managed, re-managed, scrutinized, over-then-under-funded, micro-managed, and finally finger-pointed-to-somebody-else'd when the project doesn't go right.
Our government cannot (or doesn't know how to) operate as smaller, more agile private businesses work. The pressure and accountability of every move has created a monster of over-administered and over-micro-managed web of forms, functions, procedures, and other things...
What's the solution? Frankly, I don't know. I want my government to be accountable, and I want the government to be "of the people, by the people", but I also want it to be intelligent, well-led, and a great deal less dysfunctional. If only governmental technical tasks could be more agile...
Re:Not to defend Gov't stuff... (Score:2)
2)Woefully inadequate because the person(s) in the bureaucracy don't have the tech expertise to foster the effort correctly - and yet place massive, uninformed, and inappropriate amounts of pressure on the worker bees to get the job done as per the way the non-tech person thinks it needs to go.
3)Many projects die on the vine because mis-direction (and management that honestly doesn't have the knowled
Access (Score:5, Funny)
Not true, not true. They have access to many email accounts, they just don't have accounts of their own.
The FBI is old school (Score:2)
Thank goodness... (Score:2)
Those agents are ahead of the curve! (Score:2)
Because afterall, email is for old people [slashdot.org]!
I don't get it (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Welcome, to the 20-th century, FBI. (Score:2)
Neither is involved in 99% of the messages flying around the 'net.
Heck, even Nigerian princes don't bother to type and think in their e-mails!
Re:Internal communications == borked (Score:2)
no email account != unable to communicate efficiently
Re:Internal communications == borked (Score:4, Informative)
"Christine Monaco, a spokeswoman for the FBI in New York, said Monday that all FBI agents can communicate with each other via a secure internal e-mail system, and about 75 percent of the New York office's employees have outside e-mail accounts."